Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30266091›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2018

Manipulating plant RNA-silencing pathways to improve the gene editing efficiency of CRISPR/Cas9 systems.

Yanfei Mao, Xiaoxuan Yang, Yiting Zhou, Zhengjing Zhang, Jose Ramon Botella, Jian-Kang Zhu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Advances in application of genome editing in tomato and recent development of genome editing technology.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2021
    Review
  9. Review
  10. CRISPR-based targeting of DNA methylation inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Non-GM Genome Editing Approaches in Crops.Frontiers in genome editing · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Yanfei MaoShanghai Center for Plant Stress Biology, CAS Center of Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Xiaoxuan YangShanghai Center for Plant Stress Biology, CAS Center of Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Yiting ZhouShanghai Center for Plant Stress Biology, CAS Center of Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Zhengjing ZhangShanghai Center for Plant Stress Biology, CAS Center of Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Jose Ramon BotellaSchool of Agriculture and Food Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, 4072, Australia.
Jian-Kang ZhuShanghai Center for Plant Stress Biology, CAS Center of Excellence in Molecular Plant Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China. jkzhu@sibs.ac.cn.ORCID 0000-0001-5134-731X
Chinese Academy of Sciences · CNThe University of Queensland · AU

Funding

Chinese Academy of Sciences NAYouth Innovation Promotion Association, CAS NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe CRISPR/Cas9 system, composed of a single-guide RNA for target recognition and a Cas9 protein for DNA cleavage, has the potential to revolutionize agriculture as well as medicine. Even though extensive work has been done to improve the gene editing activity of CRISPR/Cas9, little is known about the regulation of this bacterial system in eukaryotic host cells, especially at the post-transcriptional level.

resultsHere, we evaluate the expression levels of the two CRISPR/Cas9 components and the gene editing efficiency in a set of Arabidopsis mutants involved in RNA silencing. We find that mutants defective in the post-transcriptional gene-silencing pathway display significantly higher Cas9 and sgRNA transcript levels, resulting in higher mutagenesis frequencies than wild-type controls. Accordingly, silencing of AGO1 by introduction of an AGO1-RNAi cassette into the CRISPR/Cas9 vector provides an increase in gene editing efficiency. Co-expression of the viral suppressor p19 from the tomato bushy stunt virus to suppress the plant RNA-silencing pathway shows a strong correlation between the severity of the phenotypic effects caused by p19 and the gene editing efficiency of the CRISPR/Cas9 system for two different target genes, AP1 and TT4.

conclusionsThis system has useful practical applications in facilitating the detection of CRISPR/Cas9-induced mutations in T1 plants as well as the identification of transgene-free T2 plants by simple visual observation of the symptom severity caused by p19. Our study shows that CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing efficiency can be improved by reducing RNA silencing in plants.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsGene EditingRNA InterferenceArabidopsisCRISPR-Associated Protein 9MutationRNA, PlantViral ProteinsCRISPR-Associated Protein 9P19 protein, tomato bushy stunt virusRNA, PlantViral ProteinsCas9CRISPRGenome editingRNA silencingTBSV p19Viral suppressor

Identifiers

PMID30266091
PMCPMC6161460
OpenAlexW2893317770

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.